git@vger.kernel.org list mirror (unofficial, one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Damien Robert <damien.olivier.robert@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] remote.c: fix handling of %(push:remoteref)
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2020 14:48:49 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq5zfl6omm.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200303222423.wfbjuuwp3263qesv@doriath> (Damien Robert's message of "Tue, 3 Mar 2020 23:24:23 +0100")

Damien Robert <damien.olivier.robert@gmail.com> writes:

>> By the way, I have a bit higher-level question.  
>> 
>> All of the above logic that decides what should happen in "git push"
>> MUST have existing code we already use to implement "git push", no?
>
> Yes.
>
>> Why do we need to reinvent it here, instead of reusing the existing
>> code?  Is it because the interface into the functions that implement
>> the existing logic is very different from what this function wants?
>
> Mostly yes. The logic of git push is to massage the refspecs directly, for
> instance:
> 	case PUSH_DEFAULT_MATCHING:
> 		refspec_append(&rs, ":");
> 	case PUSH_DEFAULT_CURRENT:
> 		...
> 		strbuf_addf(&refspec, "%s:%s", branch->refname, branch->refname);
> 	case PUSH_DEFAULT_UPSTREAM:
> 		...
> 		strbuf_addf(&refspec, "%s:%s", branch->refname, branch->merge[0]->src);
>
> And the error messages are also not the same, and to give a good error
> message we need to parse the different cases.
>
> It may be possible to refactorize all this, but not in an obvious way and
> it would be a lot more work than this patch series.

Yeah, in light of the analysis I agree it makes sense to take the
approach of these two patches, at least for now.

Thanks.

  reply	other threads:[~2020-03-03 22:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-02-28 17:24 [PATCH 1/1] remote.c: fix handling of push:remote_ref Damien Robert
2020-02-28 18:23 ` Jeff King
2020-03-01 22:05   ` Damien Robert
2020-03-02 13:32     ` Jeff King
2020-03-03 16:12       ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Damien Robert
2020-03-03 16:12         ` [PATCH v2 1/2] remote: drop "explicit" parameter from remote_ref_for_branch() Damien Robert
2020-03-03 17:51           ` Junio C Hamano
2020-03-03 21:11             ` Jeff King
2020-03-03 22:22               ` Junio C Hamano
2020-03-03 16:12         ` [PATCH v2 2/2] remote.c: fix handling of %(push:remoteref) Damien Robert
2020-03-03 16:29           ` Damien Robert
2020-03-03 18:29             ` Junio C Hamano
2020-03-03 18:21           ` Junio C Hamano
2020-03-03 22:24             ` Damien Robert
2020-03-03 22:48               ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2020-03-12 16:45           ` [PATCH v3 1/1] " Damien Robert
2020-03-25 22:16             ` Damien Robert
2020-03-27 22:08               ` Junio C Hamano
2020-03-28 22:25                 ` Damien Robert
2020-03-28 13:15             ` Jeff King
2020-03-28 13:31               ` Jeff King
2020-04-16 15:12                 ` Damien Robert
2020-04-06 16:04               ` Damien Robert
2020-04-06 21:46                 ` Jeff King
2020-04-06 17:56             ` [RFC PATCH v4 0/2] %(push) and %(push:remoteref) bug fixes Damien Robert
2020-04-06 17:56               ` [PATCH v6 1/2] remote.c: fix %(push) for triangular workflows Damien Robert
2020-04-06 17:56               ` [PATCH v6 2/2] remote.c: fix handling of %(push:remoteref) Damien Robert
2020-04-16 15:03             ` [PATCH v8 1/1] " Damien Robert
2020-04-16 15:21               ` Damien Robert
2020-09-03 22:01                 ` Junio C Hamano
2020-09-11 21:43                   ` Damien Robert
2020-09-14 22:21                     ` Junio C Hamano
2020-03-03 16:16       ` [PATCH 1/1] remote.c: fix handling of push:remote_ref Damien Robert
2020-03-02 13:48     ` Jeff King
2020-03-03 16:25       ` Damien Robert

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=xmqq5zfl6omm.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=damien.olivier.robert@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peff@peff.net \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] remote.c: fix handling of %(push:remoteref)' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

Code repositories for project(s) associated with this inbox:

	https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).